Welcome to VegasMessageBoard
It appears you are visiting our community as a guest.
In order to view full-size images, participate in discussions, vote in polls, etc, you will need to Log in or Register.

3 Strait flushes on 5 Play STP 25 cent. too bad there wasn't a bonus at the time.

Playing 25 cent VP off a ticket with some amount near 50 bucks and I got down to 1 credit left.
hit a pair of Kings and used the double up feature to go 1,2,4,16,32.
at 32 credits I went back to max credits and not many hands later hit 4 2's

cashed out a ticket at 404 credits for 101.00 from 1 credit.
Unfortunately, that would be all she wrote for any other hits.....

Hitting 3 (or more) of 5 open-ended straight flush draws is 1 in 1385. The odds of 3 or more quads from trips on a 5-play would be the same.

When I first read this thread though, my first reaction was cringing at Venetian's God Awful 8/5/4 Double Bonus (94.18%). That's the lowest game payback I have seen for any VP game in any casino in the country (along with 10/8/5/3/1/1 Bonus which is also 94.18%). At least the double up feature is 100% return though!!! :evillaugh

One of the most frustrating things I find about playing VP is my lack of premium hands on games that pay a premium for aces / kicker and 2,3,4 / kicker. I can count on one hand the number of times I have made a premium hand on ddb or tdb. However these hands find me on JOB and BDLX. Take this hand for example which showed up after an hr of ddb play and then changing games. It makes one think that making the draw of missing cards on these games are not as random as we would think. Somehow I have to believe in the newer network gaming based machines that reel stops or in case of VP, deck shuffle happens at a higher frequency.

Take this hand for example which showed up after an hr of ddb play and then changing games. It makes one think that making the draw of missing cards on these games are not as random as we would think. Somehow I have to believe in the newer network gaming based machines that reel stops or in case of VP, deck shuffle happens at a higher frequency.

Click to expand...

In everywhere you tend to play in your TRs, this would technically be illegal. Most states mandate a random, standard poker deck of cards being spit out at you. It's still possible casinos break the law though and it's a gigantic conspiracy with IGT, but with paytables as terrible as 7/5 JoB (96.15%), is it really necessary? There are tons of other people at videopoker.com that also share your suspicion. But then I ask them...well, if standard poker deck probabilities do not apply, then why doesn't every paytable look like a "full pay" paytable (i.e. 9/6 JoB, 9/6 Boner, 9/6 DDB, 8/5 Bonus, 10/7 DB, etc.). I have yet to receive a logical answer to that... In Class II casinos, where standard poker deck probabilities do NOT apply, strategy is worthless and all the "paytables" generally look to be "full pay".

In everywhere you tend to play in your TRs, this would technically be illegal. Most states mandate a random, standard poker deck of cards being spit out at you. It's still possible casinos break the law though and it's a gigantic conspiracy with IGT, but with paytables as terrible as 7/5 JoB (96.15%), is it really necessary? There are tons of other people at videopoker.com that also share your suspicion. But then I ask them...well, if standard poker deck probabilities do not apply, then why doesn't every paytable look like a "full pay" paytable (i.e. 9/6 JoB, 9/6 Boner, 9/6 DDB, 8/5 Bonus, 10/7 DB, etc.). I have yet to receive a logical answer to that... In Class II casinos, where standard poker deck probabilities do NOT apply, strategy is worthless and all the "paytables" generally look to be "full pay".

Click to expand...

Actually I did a bit of checking and found this tidbit of information regarding whether the shuffle is completed at the time of deal or continuous.

So in VP, besides the 52 card deck there is two factors at play in card randomness. 1) The draw of replacement cards and 2) The shuffle.

Cards drawn in order of position, for example, I draw the first 5 cards off the top of the virtual deck, and thenthe next number of cards have been drawn off the deck, and are dealt based on discard position. This used to be parallel dealing, however it was deemed vulnerable to cheating. In fact some jurisdictions outlaw this. Then there is serial dealing where the next card taken is the next one in the deck, irregardless of the discarded card position.

Lastly in newer machines the shuffle is continuous and does not stop till you select your cards. So in theory, the amount of time you take to make a selection, and hit draw effects the shuffle.
This is supported by NGC regulations. See hyperlink. http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=3450 Its midway down the second page, and referred in RNG description.

So in summary, VP deck shuffling is continuous and a continuous shuffle randomizes the draw, and one could argue this is more favorable to the casino.

You're right that VP initially selected draw cards along with the dealt cards when the game was first introduced, but to my knowledge VP machines have been continuously shuffling for at least the last 20 years as a safety precaution, maybe even longer.

If the draw cards are chosen along with the deal cards and if you somehow could determine those cards before making your play, that leads to a huge player advantage.

For example, you have AAQ87, and the draw cards beneath them were QQ6Q5. Now the correct play would be to hold just the queen if you were aware of the draw cards.

But I'm not sure what kind of argument you can make that continously shuffling cards favors the casino. If both methods are correctly implemented by a random number generator, the expected long term results would be identical. All the shuffling that happens while you make your play does nothing to affect the long term result of the game.

For example, you have four to a royal and while you pray for a few seconds for that last card to appear. If 69 of those cards completed the Royal were available to be chosen while you waited to hit the draw button, it would have no influence on the machine or your long term results as long as when you actually do hit the draw button the last card is randomly chosen and any card's probability to be chosen is equal as the laws mandate.

I draw the first 5 cards off the top of the virtual deck, and thenthe next number of cards have been drawn off the deck, and are dealt based on discard position. This used to be parallel dealing, however it was deemed vulnerable to cheating. In fact some jurisdictions outlaw this. Then there is serial dealing where the next card taken is the next one in the deck, irregardless of the discarded card position.

Click to expand...

Why would parallel dealing be vulnerable to cheating?
Is the concern that the RNG isn't random enough and you can use the visible cards to estimate the chances of the next cards? If so why would serial drawing be any safer?

Apparently the RNGs in the early 90s were pretty bad (and in this case buggy). And a continuous shuffle may not really have helped back then, at least on some machines: the first cheat described relied on determining where in the RNG cycle the machine was and waiting just the precise amount of time so that they could deal when the RNG was at just the right value to give a royal.

Apparently the RNGs in the early 90s were pretty bad (and in this case buggy). And a continuous shuffle may not really have helped back then, at least on some machines: the first cheat described relied on determining where in the RNG cycle the machine was and waiting just the precise amount of time so that they could deal when the RNG was at just the right value to give a royal.

Click to expand...

Interesting read, but a few huge typos make me think this only 98% likely to be true. And very lucky they didn't get prosecuted (which also makes me question the story a bit). The vibrating device is clearly against Nevada law.